Ings/Watkins together

[Mark Albrighton]

They’re together? Blimey, first Douglas Luiz and Alisha Lehmann and now this.

Obviously it’s unexpected, but I’m genuinely happy for Danny and Ollie.

[jimmygreaves]

Ings doesn't work hard enough, and he isn't a potent enough goal threat to justify the lack of application.

He needs the whole attack to be geared around his game for him to be effective. If he bangs in 25+ goals year after year then fair enough.... but he doesn't.

The majority of the time he's a passenger. He's so hyped and overrated by some of the posters on here it's unbelievable.

Maybe it works with Ings ahead of Buendia and Coutinho, we'll see.

Watkins is clearly a significantly better forward. He contributes all over the pitch. He holds the ball up well, he has pace so he offers a threat behind defences. He's a solid out-ball for the team if required. Oh, and he gets a decent amount of goals and assists too.

It's a non argument, they don't play together well and one offers significantly more to the team than the other.

It's Watkins all day for me with Ings on the bench.

[ender4]

8 minutes ago, jimmygreaves said:

Ings doesn't work hard enough, and he isn't a potent enough goal threat to justify the lack of application.

He needs the whole attack to be geared around his game for him to be effective. If he bangs in 25+ goals year after year then fair enough.... but he doesn't.

The majority of the time he's a passenger. He's so hyped and overrated by some of the posters on here it's unbelievable.

Maybe it works with Ings ahead of Buendia and Coutinho, we'll see.

Watkins is clearly a significantly better forward. He contributes all over the pitch. He holds the ball up well, he has pace so he offers a threat behind defences. He's a solid out-ball for the team if required. Oh, and he gets a decent amount of goals and assists too.

It's a non argument, they don't play together well and one offers significantly more to the team than the other.

It's Watkins all day for me with Ings on the bench.

Interesting take.  I’d put Ings as the better player if we are just going to play one of them in front of Buendia and Coutinho.  He’s shown it over many years in his career.

But it’s close and really hard to pick just 1 of them.

[CVByrne]

Ings is by far the best finisher at the club. We're lucky to have two quality CF at the club and the more time they get together they will get a better understanding. Competition for places and options on the bench. That's what we need and that's what we've got when everyone s fit

[The Fun Factory]

No just no

Ings so far has been a monumental waste of money. 120 grand a week for a guy which doesn't fit the system and has no resale value. Whoops.

Did we do any scouting or just splurged some of the Grealish fee on a high profile player to placate the fan base?

Edited January 11, 2022 by The Fun Factory

[bobzy]

1 hour ago, jimmygreaves said:

Ings doesn't work hard enough, and he isn't a potent enough goal threat to justify the lack of application.

He needs the whole attack to be geared around his game for him to be effective. If he bangs in 25+ goals year after year then fair enough.... but he doesn't.

The majority of the time he's a passenger. He's so hyped and overrated by some of the posters on here it's unbelievable.

Maybe it works with Ings ahead of Buendia and Coutinho, we'll see.

Watkins is clearly a significantly better forward. He contributes all over the pitch. He holds the ball up well, he has pace so he offers a threat behind defences. He's a solid out-ball for the team if required. Oh, and he gets a decent amount of goals and assists too.

It's a non argument, they don't play together well and one offers significantly more to the team than the other.

It's Watkins all day for me with Ings on the bench.

I think this is incredibly unfair - he's very good at pressing which (IMO) is one of the reasons we went for him (because he's similar to Ollie).  I don't think they've been purchased to be played together, but it's a nice situation to have to be able to switch to 2 up top if necessary and have 2 good strikers filling those positions.

[Viloon]

I actually thought there were signs of it starting to come together last night, I think as always people expect things to happen straight away and don't realise it takes time and games for synergy to be formed. 

The things I like about them is they actually compliment each other, as in, Ings is clever, his runs are intelligent and his instincts are more predatory. Ollie is the worker, chases everything down and actually did ok holding the ball up last night, although that is something he still needs to improve on.

I'm not writing the partnership off yet, there are many things both lack and I would lean towards either upfront on their own in some games, depending who we are playing and who is available for us.

[Reivax_Villa]

I feel like with the Watkins and Ings issue, we can afford to have them building chemistry this season but next season it has to work.

[sparrow1988]

8 hours ago, 8pints said:

Bailey---McGinn---Luiz---Ramsey---Coutinho

What fresh hell is this? Coutinho as a LWB/LM covering a full side of the pitch. One of the main reasons Klopp was happy enough to let him go was because his little lungs couldn't keep up with their style of football.

[MrBlack]

No

[Paul33]

I think Ings and Watkins are both good strikers but both feed off early passes and we just don't do that. Buendia is touted as the feed but if we were honest with ourselves, he really isn't very good and starves our strikers of the service needed. Buendia is too slow and too lightweight for this level and is letting us down both up front and defensively where he contributes very little ...... and don't start me on the incredible number of suicide passes he makes in every game he plays.

I think Gerrard knows where our main weakness as a team is and I fully expect at least two of last night's midfield will be squaddies rather than starters by February and then you will see the best of our strikers.

Ings and Watkins failing to work together is not the problem ..... their failings are just the symptom of the real problem which is our weak midfield.

Edited January 11, 2022 by Paul33

[Tommo_b]

Think people are looking too much into this. I like having them both on the pitch personally.

[CVByrne]

9 minutes ago, Tommo_b said:

Think people are looking too much into this. I like having them both on the pitch personally.

Yeah, what other players would you have started yesterday? Chukwuemeka, AEG? 

Ings or Watkins are far better than either of those two 

[CVByrne]

16 minutes ago, Paul33 said:

I think Ings and Watkins are both good strikers but both feed off early passes and we just don't do that. Buendia is touted as the feed but if we were honest with ourselves, he really isn't very good and starves our strikers of the service needed. Buendia is too slow and too lightweight for this level and is letting us down both up front and defensively where he contributes very little ...... and don't start me on the incredible number of suicide passes he makes in every game he plays.

I think Gerrard knows where our main weakness as a team is and I fully expect at least two of last night's midfield will be squaddies rather than starters by February and then you will see the best of our strikers.

Ings and Watkins failing to work together is not the problem ..... their failings are just the symptom of the real problem which is our weak midfield.

We get very little from the full backs. Cash is better going forward than Targett but neither create much in way of chances. The system we have is then totally reliant on 3 attacking players and sometimes support from one of the midfielders.

[MakemineVanilla]

When it comes to their stats, there's hardly anything between them, and so we have to ask what area of the pitch do we sacrifice by playing both of them.

[The Fun Factory]

10 minutes ago, MakemineVanilla said:

When it comes to their stats, there's hardly anything between them, and so we have to ask what area of the pitch do we sacrifice by playing both of them.

The midfield. Which currently looks as wishy-washy as a Bojo press statement.

[kevpants]

Watkins isn't a good enough finisher to command the central striker spot himself. For me it has to be Ings, I just have more confidence in him when he gets a chance vs Watkins trademark slipping while striking the ball and hoping it goes under the bar rather than over it, his ball striking technique is poor.

[MakemineVanilla]

5 minutes ago, kevpants said:

Watkins isn't a good enough finisher to command the central striker spot himself. For me it has to be Ings, I just have more confidence in him when he gets a chance vs Watkins trademark slipping while striking the ball and hoping it goes under the bar rather than over it, his ball striking technique is poor.

Watkins' shooting accuracy is slightly higher than Ings.

Ings goals per minutes on the pitch is slightly higher than Watkins.

Watkins has a goal more than Ings.

Ings has an assist more than Watkins.

[kevpants]

1 minute ago, MakemineVanilla said:

Watkins' shooting accuracy is slightly higher than Ings.

Ings goals per minutes on the pitch is slightly higher than Watkins.

Watkins has a goal more than Ings.

Ings has an assist more than Watkins.

I'm speaking generally and based on watching them for a few seasons rather than this year's stats. It's kind of based on feel, which might be a bit wishy-washy. For example if Ings is played through 1:1 I'm 80% confident he buries it. With Watkins I'm probably 40%. 

Watkins work rate and athleticism are fantastic though. I just want someone clinical in the central striker role.

[Zatman]

Watkins more dynamic and Ings is the better footballer. They have the skills to work together but seems Ollie is not keen

2nd half last night they finallly looked like they tried to make it work